At least until MPHJ funds a successful campaign to replace her come next elections.

Cheaper to just start shaking down businesses in states that don't have strong protections on the books. Alabama, maybe? Trolling business models like the path of least resistance. When they start running out of states, the tactics will surely change.

I would hope we don't have to wait for a bunch more states to take action, and get something done at the federal level. There should be political will on both sides of the aisle for this, if it gets enough exposure that it is "hurting small businesses."

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

There sadly is little recourse for sending out sketchy extortion letters for both IP and patents. I was actually going to strike that through ironically, but in some of these cases (hi prenda) it's likely accurate. Until that happens and consumers and businesses are aware of how they can complain or fight back with consequences befitting that kind of abuse, the relative risk is pretty low considering the millions you can rake in while dancing around the legal system.

Unfortunately the only thing I can think of would be some sort of arbitration group or oversight committee that has to approve these letters before they can go out, and have knowledge and access to the patent office directly. Given the opinion people have been gathering of the US patent office lately though, the odds of such a committee being rendered sterile are pretty high. It would, however, both provide authenticity of a settlement request and require some skin in the game for people prior to sending the letters, like a notary.

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

I'm not missing that at all. I'm very well acquainted with patents and the rights they grant. I'm also well acquainted with the fact that there's more patents applied for than are able to get full review and the USPTO tends to grant a fair number that get a limited review (yes, I'm glossing over a lot of details there).

What I specifically mean is they've got such a track record of backing down anytime someone actually stands up to them that it creates an appearance of them knowing they don't have a leg to stand on and that the patent will not hold up to the scrutiny of a properly mounted challenge.

Which, if provable, means they're engaged in fraud and extortion. Patent number or not.

Otherwise do you really think they'd make these deals with state AGs if they thought they had a defensible patent? They're exercising their right, pure and simple. If so many people are violating their patents, wouldn't they want a show down that they could include in their notice letters?

While trademark law isn't perfect, at least it has a requirement that trademark holders actively use the trademark in question. If patent holders were required to actually produce or partner in the production of products that use the patent in question, it would eliminate some of trolls just looking to extort money without ever producing an item using the patent in question.

And no, partners wouldn't include the extorted "licensees" that paid due to threatening letters.

While trademark law isn't perfect, at least it has a requirement that trademark holders actively use the trademark in question. If patent holders were required to actually produce or partner in the production of products that use the patent in question, it would eliminate some of trolls just looking to extort money without ever producing an item using the patent in question.

And no, partners wouldn't include the extorted "licensees" that paid due to threatening letters.

Edit: spelling

As far as I know, at least in Europe, a patent cannot be used to block a process/an invention. You have to either use it, or propose a licence. But the trolls here are not blocking the so called invention, they just require what they call a "fair price" for the use of the technology.

It's very nice that these trolls are quicked out of Minnesota. But what, the most obvious troll, with known and published anteriorities to their patents published by major scanner companies, are stil in operation and should still be dealt with individually by each state ?

This shows this is not the right way to deal with trolls in particular and patent law in general.

There should be a complete upheaval of the patent system, to make sure any delivered patent brings real value to the people. After all, that is why the patent law is in place. Patentee is given an exclusivity in exchange for value to the people.

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

Patent law should be changed to say that you have to sue the manufacturer. You can't sue the users.

So to summarize Minnesota went the roundabout way and dealt with a single troll instead of going after the source. I get that the issue is hard to tackle (Mostly because tons of lobby money says it is all good) but this amounts to political posturing nothing more.

The patent system is broken and everybody knows it, dumping trolls on other states is just a short term measure at best. Reluctance to deal with the patent system costs millions to companies each year probably much more than that politicians gain by siding with the current patent system.

edit: @CS Thanks for the explanation it made more sense and presents a valid point.

There used to be a pretty firm connection between "legal" and "right." We didn't need strong protections, because there were some things that, while technically allowed by law, a gentleman didn't do. Well, scrap all that - people will do anything to anyone if there's a loophole in the law that allows it - witness the NSA surveillance debacle. Late night TV is filled with commercials from lawyers who promise to get you "big bucks" for your "damages." It used to be that such things just weren't done, because it was below the dignity of the profession. The floor has fallen, obviously.

Other than lawyers suddenly remembering they are human beings, I see no solution, other than continuing to plug holes in the dike as Minnesota has.

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

Valid point, and this kind of situation is why the Constitutional Convention left so much latitude for the states to develop and enforce their own laws. When the Fed drops the ball the states can fix it - as long as it doesn't infringe on another state.

It used to be that such things just weren't done, because it was below the dignity of the profession. .

IIRC, it was actually against the law for lawyers and doctors to advertise. In the (Reagan?) recent past, these laws were abolished to "encourage competition in the marketplace" and "level the playing field".

-They know small businesses cannot afford lengthy court battles.-They mislead people every step of the way to make them think they stand to lose everything horribly.-They are basically robbing them at financial gunpoint.-They're @#$#!$@ assholes..

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

Patent law should be changed to say that you have to sue the manufacturer. You can't sue the users.

I totally agree. I have never understood why the _users_ of the product were liable. That seems totally backwards.

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

Patent law should be changed to say that you have to sue the manufacturer. You can't sue the users.

I totally agree. I have never understood why the _users_ of the product were liable. That seems totally backwards.

Has this company every actually sued a scanner-using company or just sent out demand letters?

Long ago I worked at a company that got a letter demanding a patent royalty for violating someone's patent on using LEDs for the purpose of illumination.

Our response was basically "illumination is the purpose of LEDs and is nonpatentable, but if you want to lose in court and pay our attorney's fees, then bring it on". We never heard from them again.

The amusing thing is that there is no way we could have afforded a court battle at that time.

So to summarize Minnesota went the roundabout way and dealt with a single troll instead of going after the source. I get that the issue is hard to tackle (Mostly because tons of lobby money says it is all good) but this amounts to political posturing nothing more.

The attorney general decided to go after this troll for supposedly running afoul of existing laws. You need this to happen regardless of what laws the legislature decides to pass. Comprehensive patent law reform is not going to mean too much if people (attorney generals included) do not go after those individual companies that are violating the law (new or old).

The best part of this is that a government agency (full of lawyers, no less) explicitly calls MPHJ "trolls" rather than making use of the usual neutral language. That would be like the EPA referring to BP as "asshats" after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Not that that is a bad thing....

One reform I'd like to see is a law shielding the customers from legal action. The patent hold should be able to protect their patent, but they'd have to take action against the manufacturer of the "infringing" product. This would remove the incentive to "bully" people who can't afford to defend themselves from lawfirms with business plans designed to exploit the relatively "weak" end-user.

What is the detail I'm missing that makes this something other that flat out fraud + actual extortion?They have plenty of past behavior that says they know they don't have a legal leg to stand on if this ever got to court.

I'm genuinely not an anti-government sort of person - but what you're missing here is that they've been granted the right to do this by the US Government. They applied to a government agency on the basis that their invention is unique and novel, and that they should therefore be given the exclusive rights to use and/or license it for a limited term, and the government agreed to give them those rights. Once the government agrees, why wouldn't they exploit the situation?

I'm not missing that at all. I'm very well acquainted with patents and the rights they grant. I'm also well acquainted with the fact that there's more patents applied for than are able to get full review and the USPTO tends to grant a fair number that get a limited review (yes, I'm glossing over a lot of details there).

What I specifically mean is they've got such a track record of backing down anytime someone actually stands up to them that it creates an appearance of them knowing they don't have a leg to stand on and that the patent will not hold up to the scrutiny of a properly mounted challenge.

Which, if provable, means they're engaged in fraud and extortion. Patent number or not.

Otherwise do you really think they'd make these deals with state AGs if they thought they had a defensible patent? They're exercising their right, pure and simple. If so many people are violating their patents, wouldn't they want a show down that they could include in their notice letters?

I'm gonna be honest here: if its provable that they know this patent can't hold up to real scrutiny, than any deal that any AG is making should involve handcuffs.

There sadly is little recourse for sending out sketchy extortion letters for both IP and patents. I was actually going to strike that through ironically, but in some of these cases (hi prenda) it's likely accurate. Until that happens and consumers and businesses are aware of how they can complain or fight back with consequences befitting that kind of abuse, the relative risk is pretty low considering the millions you can rake in while dancing around the legal system.

Unfortunately the only thing I can think of would be some sort of arbitration group or oversight committee that has to approve these letters before they can go out, and have knowledge and access to the patent office directly. Given the opinion people have been gathering of the US patent office lately though, the odds of such a committee being rendered sterile are pretty high. It would, however, both provide authenticity of a settlement request and require some skin in the game for people prior to sending the letters, like a notary.

What's needed is an organization with deep pockets - along the lines of the Ford Foundation or the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation - to take these trolls to court on behalf of the small fry victims who currently find it cheaper to pay the protection fee.

Using this example, if every company in the country who currently "violates" one of their patents were to pony up $100 each (10% of the extortion demanded), we could fund such a foundation and get this and many other dubious patents invalidated. If I were a lawyer, I'd start a Kickstarter to fund this, but as a non-lawyer I wouldn't know how to begin if I did raise the money.